godofsteele
Chieftain
Maybe the coffee shop is a garden that comes later somewhere in the renaissance instead of the medieval era and makes up for it by giving a much bigger GP boost plus culture.
Austria
- Thread starter fuzzatron717
- Start date
cool3a2
Deity
- Joined
- Mar 30, 2007
- Messages
- 2,177
LOL!
Seriously, it would have been okay if the Hussar would have been made Austrias UU for a Scenario or even through a mod, but doing that in this general way is just a huge mistake. Huszárs have their roots clearly in Hungary, at least those units that are mostly meant with the word Hussar. The creators of civ5 show once more how less they care for the user community - what unit should now be given to Hungary in a civ mod?! And of course, this makes it clear that Hungary will never be included with civ5. Not to mention that the whole Austria civ was a questionable idea: in sense of civilization, Austria is part of Germany, that's it. Rest in peace, civ5...
Denmark has Norwegian ski troops; Sweden has Finnish cavalry; Austria has Hungarian hussars. So? Hungary was part of Austria at one point.
There should be a rule that people kvetching about the lack of inclusion of their own country should be beaten repeatedly about the head and neck.
There should be a rule that people kvetching about the lack of inclusion of their own country should be beaten repeatedly about the head and neck.
While the word has origins in Hungary, Hussars were used by all European powers, and today when people think of hussars I dare to say that the famous English hussars french hussars of Napoleon, German hussars with their skull-logo hats and Austrian hussars come to people's minds way before Hungary. For example grenadiers are a french origins, but if there would be a UU for England called Grenadiers I think it would work just fine, and nobody would complain.
It's not like having them with a UU called Samurai or something like that..
I'm from Finland and I don't care that Finland (and Hungary) will never make it to Civ. We have our histories but we have been ruled over by much stronger "Civs" that deserve to be in the game more, and so be it. My self esteem can handle it.
It's not like having them with a UU called Samurai or something like that..
I'm from Finland and I don't care that Finland (and Hungary) will never make it to Civ. We have our histories but we have been ruled over by much stronger "Civs" that deserve to be in the game more, and so be it. My self esteem can handle it.
JeanBaptiste
Warlord
- Joined
- Sep 19, 2011
- Messages
- 177
I'm from Finland and I don't care that Finland (and Hungary) will never make it to Civ. We have our histories but we have been ruled over by much stronger "Civs" that deserve to be in the game more, and so be it. My self esteem can handle it.
And for that you have my utmost respect! Btw, good luck in the Ice Hockey World Championship.
Louis XXIV
Le Roi Soleil
The word Hussar doesn't mean medieval Hungarian Hussars, it means the light cavalry from the war of Austrian Succession to after Napoleon.
Why not create a new Austrian unit for your mod? It's a mod, it's simple enough.
The inclusion of the Huns with the Austrians made it highly unlikely to begin with. Considering the amount of complaining regarding European civs, I don't expect many more.
AbsintheRed
Deity
This may be true for Finland, but not for Hungary
Hungary was one of the dominant powers of central and eastern europe for over 600 years, throughtout most of the medieval era
Until the Ottoman conquests in the middle of the 16th century Hungary was never ruled over by any "stronger civs", in fact she was the most important power in the area, and usually one of the most powerful states in whole Europe
Instead of being ruled over, rather Hungary ruled over most of her neighbors from time to time...
I don't want to get into nationalistic stuff, but the only reason against Hungary is the lack of information about her history in Western Europe and North America
I know it sounds strange, but it's somewhat the same case with some very deserving African or Asian civs.
There is no European dominance in the civ selection, but Western European dominance
It's a shame that the Huns and Austria was selected to represent the area instead of Hungary and Poland
Huns as a full civ? Austria when there is Germany? And another very similar situation in GK: Sweden when there is Denmark?
Don't get me wrong, I'm not against any of those civs. There are just so many way better options. 2 or 3 from Europe, and at least 10 from the other continents
The only possible reason for them is that they sound more familiar for an average guy in western europe/north america. Probably in some other parts of the world as well.
But isn't adding historical civs is about learning new and interesting stuff, besides the fun with the new and different game opportunities of course?
Medieval Hungary is a very unique civ with unique background, and with a very colorful history
Even if we are not talking about adding them as a full civ, but the medieval/renaissance scenario.
Hussar as an Austrian UU means Hungary won't appear there as a civ either
Again, what was the theme of the scenario? Mongol and Ottoman conquests, into the renaissance, pope, crusades, religious wars
A quick glance on all these:
- Continuous rule over a huge territory in one of the most affected areas of many of those listed things. Actually Hungarian kings had the most territory in Europe on a couple occasions
- Unfortunately Hungary took one of the biggest blows of the mongol conquests in Europe, and definitely took the biggest part in fighting the Ottomans. Both conquests had way too much part in shaping the history of the country
- Hungarian kings had the biggest income in Europe in the 12-15 century every now and then, and Hungary was the very first country where renaissance spread from the Italian cities
- Most of our rulers had very strong ties with the popes, took part in a couple crusades of course. Btw Hungary has the most catholic saints. 5 or 6 only from the Arpad dynasty, if I remember correctly...
- The country was on the border of catholicism, orthodoxy and islam at the time of the Ottoman conquests, so Hungarians had to grow very tolerant about religion. After the 30 years war many religious minorities found home in Hungary, especially in Transylvania
Sry about the rant, but I still cannot beleive it... How could Firaxis leave them out?
Hungary is the perfect civ for this scenario
And would have been a very fitting, unique civ in the main game itself
Louis XXIV
Le Roi Soleil
Firaxis has never included an "essentially" Medieval Civ with the exceptions of the Byzantines and Arabs who both started before the classic Medieval era and were the two largest empires of the area. I don't think it's anything against Hungary, it's just something against the Middle Ages.
But it could be awkward. No one wants to include the Burgandians, for example, or the Normans (I'd argue Norman civilization was distinct from both French and Viking and included England, Southern Italy, and Northern France at one point). So the line drawing is difficult. I personally would put Poland-Lithuania above Hungary, but I can't deny the importance of both in the Middle Ages.
But it could be awkward. No one wants to include the Burgandians, for example, or the Normans (I'd argue Norman civilization was distinct from both French and Viking and included England, Southern Italy, and Northern France at one point). So the line drawing is difficult. I personally would put Poland-Lithuania above Hungary, but I can't deny the importance of both in the Middle Ages.
Let the beatings commence.
AbsintheRed
Deity
I agree with Poland, it's another very deserving civ
But disagree about Burgundy and the Normans
The difference with Hungary and those two is that Hungary isn't only a medieval civ, just happen to be on the hight of her power and had the golden ages during that era, between 900-1500
Hungarians started their history as a distinct civ/nation/group way before 900.
After conquering the Carpathian-basin, more than 600 years of dominance in the area, then centuries of very active struggle with the Ottomans and then against the Habsburg dominance, then another breif golden age in Austria-Hungary, and then the wars of the 20th century and everything else...
I'm biased of course, but I don't think it's anything similar to Burgundy or the Normans even when I try to stay objective
Same case with Poland. These 2 deserve their place much more in CiV than many already included civs
AbsintheRed
Deity
I stayed as cultured about it as I could
Hussar as an UU for Austria is a mistake, if nothing else then because of the scenario
Louis XXIV
Le Roi Soleil
The Hussar isn't a mistake because it refers to the Light Cavalry of Reformation and Napoleonic Europe. At this point, it is far removed from the Hungarians. You have to keep in mind this is an American game. From the English-speaking perspective, Hussars are not medieval Hungarian cavalry, they are Napoleonic cavalry.
As for civs that could be included, hell, I normally argue for Venice. There are a lot of different options. Large land Kingdoms (what Hungary and Poland were) are only one thing that merits consideration. If you look to military success, the Normans were unprecedented. If you look to commerce and naval power, you have Venice. Burgandy was a Kingdom that disappeared and left little cultural remains that wasn't absorbed into France and Germany. That's why they were forgotten. But if someone made a Civilization game in the 11th Century, they might think they merited more consideration than we do. I think Hungary deserves more credit than they normally get, but they've always been a long, long shot. Budapest is in the game, at least you get some credit.
As for civs that could be included, hell, I normally argue for Venice. There are a lot of different options. Large land Kingdoms (what Hungary and Poland were) are only one thing that merits consideration. If you look to military success, the Normans were unprecedented. If you look to commerce and naval power, you have Venice. Burgandy was a Kingdom that disappeared and left little cultural remains that wasn't absorbed into France and Germany. That's why they were forgotten. But if someone made a Civilization game in the 11th Century, they might think they merited more consideration than we do. I think Hungary deserves more credit than they normally get, but they've always been a long, long shot. Budapest is in the game, at least you get some credit.
elprofesor
Pluri-editing poster
... plus we still have to get Portugal first...
Louis XXIV
Le Roi Soleil
Personally, I could do without Portugal. We have a glut of Enlightenment-era European civs and a third seafaring enlightenment-era European civ would be overkill. I take the inclusion of Lisbon as a realization that they might not be in, so there's no need to withhold the City-State. While it's true that city-states have been added and then removed, I don't think they intentionally planned it this way. On the other hand, obvious civ choices like the Netherlands and Carthage were never included as city-states. Seoul is the only one I'm going back and forth on. My theory is that they initially had no plans to add Korea, but decided to change their mind when a Korean language version was planned. Portugal might eventually be added, I just see Lisbon as them changing their minds and deciding not to include them.
If we had to go European, I'd rather a European civ we have not seen before. That's why I like Austria and Sweden over Portugal.
If we had to go European, I'd rather a European civ we have not seen before. That's why I like Austria and Sweden over Portugal.
AbsintheRed
Deity
I more or less agree. But I didn't say it's a mistake because they are not fitting for Austria - light cavalry do fit for them
I said it's a mistake because they prevent the inclusion of Hungary in the scenario. Firaxis could have easily chosen another UU for Austria, which is at least as fitting for them as Hussars
Actually that's my modding goal. Or at least part of it...
A somewhat historical european mod focusing mostly on the medieval ages
Beleive me, I'm absolutely with you on this
You should check out our mod for Civ IV (follow my signature, or here is a link to the subforum)
Europe between 500-1800 with Rise and Fall mechanics. Dynamic spawns, respawns, stability, crusades, plagues, etc... And of course Unique Historical Victories.
Apart from the "base" civs, we have Burgundy, Venice, Bulgaria, Kievan Rus, Lithuania, of course Hungary and Poland. Sweden and Austria. Heck, we even have Al-Andalus and Genoa too
You seem like someone who would enjoy it
Louis XXIV
Le Roi Soleil
I suspect they want to keep Hungary as a city-state because it will allow Austria to acquire it through their Unique Ability. I know that's not what you probably wanted to hear. FWIW, the time period of this scenario is less than ideal for Hungary. Although the scenario seems to include at least the end of the Renaissance, it seems to want to build up to the 30 Years War, which is after truly independent Hungary. The civs in the scenario seemed focused on that point.
I'll check out R&F: Europe when I get a chance. I don't have as much free time for Civ4 right now since I've been focusing on Civ5
I'll check out R&F: Europe when I get a chance. I don't have as much free time for Civ4 right now since I've been focusing on Civ5
About Lisbon,it is pretty obvious that the only reason to add them as a city-state was because of the Medieval Scenario and because Portugal wouldn't be interesting to add as a Civilization in this scenario,unlike Sweden and Austria . Beyond Portugal,I do not hope that there will be more European Civs in the future .
Louis XXIV
Le Roi Soleil
Why even add Portugal?
SHaW1986
Prince
you know if the hussars are the only unique unit that people can come up with for hungary i would question their relevance anyway, just because austria has the hussar doesnt mean that there can be no hungary
